Related Experiment Video
Updated: Apr 5, 2026

07:29
A Standardized Protocol for Preference Testing to Assess Fish Welfare
Published on: February 22, 2020
7.5K
Simplifying the Welfare Quality® assessment protocol for broiler chicken welfare
I C de Jong1, V A Hindle1, A Butterworth2
11Wageningen UR Livestock Research,PO Box 338,6700 AH Wageningen,The Netherlands.
Animal : an International Journal of Animal Bioscience
|August 27, 2015
Summary
Simplifying the Welfare Quality® (WQ) broiler assessment protocol can significantly reduce evaluation time. New strategies predict animal welfare indicators, making assessments more practical for stakeholders.
Area of Science:
- Animal Welfare Science
- Livestock Production Systems
- Veterinary Public Health
Background:
- The Welfare Quality® (WQ) assessment protocol uses animal-based measures for welfare evaluation.
- Stakeholders require reduced assessment time for improved practical applicability.
- Existing protocols may contain calculation errors needing correction.
Purpose of the Study:
- To investigate time reduction potential for the WQ broiler assessment protocol.
- To propose and evaluate protocol modifications and simplification strategies.
- To correct errors in original WQ protocol calculations.
Main Methods:
- Data from 180 on-farm and 150 slaughter plant broiler flock assessments were analyzed.
- Correlation analysis identified relationships between welfare indicators for simplification.
- Two strategies were developed: predicting on-farm gait scores from hock burn, and substituting on-farm measures with slaughter plant data.
Main Results:
- Strategy 1 (predicting gait scores from hock burn) could reduce on-farm assessment time by ~1 hour (25-33%).
- Strategy 2 (using slaughter plant data) could reduce on-farm assessment time by ~2 hours (50-67%).
- Both strategies showed close agreement with the full protocol, but with large confidence intervals for specificity.
Conclusions:
- Proposed simplification strategies for the WQ broiler protocol are promising for reducing assessment time.
- Strategy 1 and Strategy 2 offer significant time savings, enhancing practical applicability.
- Further validation and testing across diverse welfare categories are recommended for both strategies.

